Thinking about going with clones

[ZenGolfer]

Very good points.

 

This highlights the need for such a site as MGS where we can view unbiased reviews and discuss with others their experiences.

 

AJ

Agree. That test by MGS really opened my eyes to the fact that maybe clones are just as good and that mostly what youre paying more with for with a name brand is reputation, hype and marketing.

[RoverRick]

Agree. That test by MGS really opened my eyes to the fact that maybe clones are just as good and that mostly what youre paying more with for with a name brand is reputation, hype and marketing.

 

 

I have not seen MGS do any reviews of clones. They have reviewed some Dynacraft Prophets and some Royal Connection or collection drivers. These are not clones as much as lesser known brands. However, even these have come in at the bottom of their ratings system. I checked, and this appeared to be based on performance not just likelihood of puchase or "BUZZ". I see some clones on eBay all the time Taylor Fit is one that comes to mind, and these really do seem like cheap imitations.

 

WD will now rip me a new one for using the (Dynacraft) Prophets name in vain, but I am just going by the review.

[GolfSpy WD]

WD will now rip me a new one for using the (Dynacraft) Prophets name in vain, but I am just going by the review.

 

Yep, by quoting the review:

 

Here's what I think. When we start looking at accuracy scores for irons in this category, we won't find many that out perform the Dynacraft Prophet Tour Forged Irons. When we talk about feel, we'll find few that offer better. And when we talk about forgiveness, I expect we'll find similar performance among all the player's cavity-backs we test. Of course, when we start asking testers to rate those clubs, we'll see measurably higher numbers because we've all been conditioned to think big OEM is always better. It's not.

 

For any golfer looking for a player's cavity-back, you'd have to be a fool not to consider the Dynacraft Prophet Tour Forged Irons. With just about any shaft and grip combo you could ask for, the price would still be below $450.00. It borders on insanity, and yet people will gladly pay twice as much for identical performance.

 

As I said, I'm not a big fan of the looks of these irons, and that would be everything I'd need to keep them out of my bag, but considering most of our testers felt differently, I've come away from this review feeling a bit frustrated. While the final score is plenty solid, nearly everything about the Dynacraft Prophet Tour Forged Irons makes me think they deserve a bit better.

 

I've done side by side comparisons with the MP63, Adams CB4/Pro A12 irons and the difference in feel was hardly noticable. The MP59 stood out, the TM tour stuff was just crap.

[RoverRick]

Yep, by quoting the review:

 

 

 

I've done side by side comparisons with the MP63, Adams CB4/Pro A12 irons and the difference in feel was hardly noticable. The MP59 stood out, the TM tour stuff was just crap.

Dynacrafts are not clones. They are components. But that is the closest review I have seen yet when you look at the number score they are towards the bottom. Same with the royal whatever but not components. I have seen no review of clones just what GD had about a1/4 page deal on fakes.

[xxio]

I looked up the Pinemeadow site. What do you know they have the specs up, good for them. I will say it could be the camera angle but "0" face angle pics of some clubs show them to be pretty closed. I'm sure since that is advertised you should be able to return it if it wasn't.

 

Some their products new are about 1/2-2/3 the price of very good condition OEM prices on ebay or discount sellers.

 

Is the price difference worth it? I guess the buyer determines that. So many things to consider.

 

We have all heard the stories of guys busting up their R9s and being sent an R11 as a replacement. If I bust up my Pinemeadow what will they send me?

 

I have been down the component route and also been down clone road (albeit much shorter travel) and for me the decision to buy was 1/3 price savings, 1/3 being able to thumb my nose at the guy who bought the $350 driver that performed like "my own creation". The other 1/3 was just to be different I guess.

 

Now that OEMs now offer better shaft upgrades and the business model is now products from 2 years ago can be had at half the price I prefer going the OEM route. The warranties and

the ability to find more reviews on them just wins out.

[xxio]

Dynacrafts are not clones. They are components.

 

 

I wish I had a quarter for each time someone referred to Dynacrafts, Wishons, Maltbys as clones....i would be able to buy me a set of componentsfrom Wishon or Dynacraft by now.

[RoverRick]

Look up a Taylor fit made r11 hybrid on eBay. You can get one (non conforming ) for $39.99 with the Championship Long Drive Shaft. It looks like a TMag r11 rescue. And for $40 or $50 with shipping you can find out.

It would be interesting to have that club go thought the review process and have the specs checked. But not with my $40. I'll put another $40 with it and get a Nike vr pro.

[Kanoito]

If I bust up my Pinemeadow what will they send me?

 

The warranties and

the ability to find more reviews on them just wins out.

 

More reviews, yes, I'll give that one to you.

 

But the clone companies also stand behind their product with 30-day satisfaction program and 1 year warranty. Some models with life-time warranty.

 

True, they probably won't be able to replace a 4 year old R9 for a new R11s, but let's be real... you pay $70 for a clone vs $300 brand club. Can't expect them to offer the same warranty with those margins.

[xxio]

Can't expect them to offer the same warranty with those margins.

 

 

No argument from me there. That is just part of the buying process.

 

It would be unfair to expect Pinemeadow to have the same customer service as Callaway. When I had X16Pros with the Tour Stiff shafts I found out the Tour stiffs were 6.5 Rifle shafts in bore thrus! I emailed Callaway saying they were too stiff. They were willing to replace for free to the Tour Regular for free with NEW X16Pro Series, even paying for shipping (ConUs). Unfortunately I already had gone home overseas. The overseas shipping would have been on me though (fair enough). I ended up selling them.

 

I can buy last year's OEM driver at $179 and have warranty vs $89 for the clone with the hit or miss. Most club OEMs and Clones have playability guarantees, but it is still a process to return and refund for both OEM and clones.

 

When was the last time you had a demo day with Pinemeadows?

 

Do I think OEMs are overpriced? Yes I do, but I will probably continue to buy a OEM's last year's model when I need a new club just for the extra services which I probably won't need until something actually goes wrong.

 

Another guy brought up conformity. It may not be a biggie for some guys, but I play at least one tournament a month (at least my club's monthly medal). Being known as an "equipment guy" I could never live down the ignominy of getting DQ'd for playing a club not on the conforming list. Even for regular rounds which at my club are all used for handicapping purposes we can only use conforming clubs. I will have to check if Taylor Fit is on the conforming list before I buy it.

[revkev]

This is a very interesting discussion -

 

In the end it is up to the buyer - this Gajin asked the question he's gotten plenty of answers - what else should he expect here?

 

I remain convinced that the better way to go is yesterday's stuff - Like many of us - I would argue all of us I have to be cost/value conscious - even if your budget is greater than mine you should be going for value always - how do I get the most bang for my buck.

 

Ultimately each player will decide that for his own game - you could easily buy 2 clone drivers, take them to a fitter have them checked out to make sure their construction is sound and put the one that is the better fit into play for less than the cost of a new driver from an OEM - might be a good strategy. I don't know.

 

I consciouly purchased Nicklaus irons 10 years ago because it was first rate quality but since there was little advertising it was at about 4/5 the price of comparable iron sets. I would have gone with Nicklaus woods as well but couldn't find a driver that fit me - they all launched too high and produced too much spin.

 

Nicklaus is now defunct as a manufacture - you don't advertise, you can't compete in the high end club market IMO. Also because of the contest I don't have to worry about cost - I'm confident that Mizuno can produce the best quality iron out there - I'd say the same for TMag with the fitting element that I'll receive - but that part of the deal is worth about $200 - add that to a driver with an upgraded shaft so that it might be $500 and you're looking at a pretty steep off the street value. I get not wanting to do that - I couldn't that's for sure.

[RoverRick]

This is a very interesting discussion -

 

In the end it is up to the buyer - this Gajin asked the question he's gotten plenty of answers - what else should he expect here?

 

I remain convinced that the better way to go is yesterday's stuff -

 

I agree with this totally. I looked yesterday and you can get a really nice set of Ben Hogan CFT's with a 3&4 hybrid and 5-P for $100. I have these irons and now that I have the proper shafts in them they are great. They always were, just did not fit my swing. If I could use the standard shaft in clubs, and was going to make a new set I could get these, and some TMag Superfast driver and fairways and have a pretty good set for $300-400 dollars. The price of a new TMag driver. This is the same with any brand of clubs.

[Ice]

I actually played Cobra clone irons before I had the Hogans. I never hit the real version but they worked quite well for me. They'd probably still be in my bag if they didn't have so much offset.

[SeeRed]

I do have moral issues with clones, but you should check out the component guys if you want good quality for cheaper. Specifically Hireko (Dynacraft/Acer), Golfworks (Maltby), and Wishon.

 

The other thing to do is buy last years stuff or buy used. It's just a little harder to get them to your specs this way.

This is spot on IMHO. I've played Dynacraft and Maltby clubs and found them to be very well made and nice to play. And there is so much stuff on the used market now it's crazy. I recently, and for the first time ever, broke down and paid for a fitting and Ping irons. I love 'em, but would I say they are 2-3X better than the Dynacrafts I used to play? Well...

[Tyk]

People always seem to get clones, components, and counterfeits confused.

 

Clones are clubs designed to look like a popular big name club. I guess there is no reason why they couldn't be high quality and perform well. The primary goal of a clone design is to LOOK as much like another club as possible without being sued. With that end goal in mind I find it hard to believe that there is really much consideration given to actual performance. A name brand club designer is presumably making a club that will perform a certain way, then they dress it up with plating and badges and logos etc. How much of a club is design and how much of it is cosmetic is debatable even from an OEM. I think that in general, a big OEM is starting with a design they believe in, and then from there they are using cosmetics to appeal to their target buyer. When you take a company like TaylorMade or Callway that release new versions all the time, I am always a bit suspect when version 3 looks just like version 1 with a different color finish and a new badge design. In some regards I almost view those new generations of clubs as almost a clone of themselves. Of course they want you to think that they've tweaked the design just a little to make what was good better. I'm sure that in some cases they have.

 

With a clone, I don't have faith that actual club performance is ever really the primary goal. I don't have faith that they have studied weighting or turf interaction or vibration or sound. If you believe that the primary goal is to come up with a product that looks like a popular OEM club, then there really is no reason for them to take the time to independently research what is actually GOOD as it relates to golf. So if you think that is what they are doing, then whatever they come up with that looks like a popular club that won't get them sued might perform well, or it might not. It just depends on what features they chose to copy closely that matter and what doesn't. They could of course accidentally design a better club in some regards, but it won't be because they meant to, and it won't be a consistent feature of their clone line. If you believe that you can't tell the difference and it doesn't matter to you that the primary objective of the clubs you are playing is not to be a well designed club, but to look like what is at least perceived to be a well designed club, then you should buy clones. Likewise if you believe that the big club makers are not actually designing clubs to perform but are merely trying to make pretty heads that sell, then you should buy clones.

 

Personally, I would not buy clones because I have no faith in what I believe is their primary purpose. I also will not overspend to much on the marketing hype of OEM's either. I will buy used, or older discounted OEM clubs after testing and researching them, or I would consider component clubs who's business model is not based as much around marketing hype but are still designing clubs with performance as the primary objective.

[BK in TEXAS]

Clones are clubs designed to look like a popular big name club. I guess there is no reason why they couldn't be high quality and perform well. The primary goal of a clone design is to LOOK as much like another club as possible without being sued. With that end goal in mind I find it hard to believe that there is really much consideration given to actual performance.

I agree with that completely.

 

I bought Diamond Tour wedges to try out because of the ginormous price difference compared to Vokey's. $25 for a complete club vs $125. I didn't want used wedges......I wanted brand spanking new grooves. The wedges rocked....I love them.....I still play them......I will buy them again. Anyway, that prompted me to try out their RBZ hybrid clone....thinking it would rock as well. Well....not so much. I dumped that club in short order.

 

So ya...I agree with Tyk that you may or may not get a fantastic clone. Unfortunately there are almost no credible reviews and we're left to taking a chance if we wanna try. Next time I try out a clone I'll post a review. Maybe some of us others could too.

[ZenGolfer]

Yea, Pinemeadow's been around forever it's seems. They're in Dunhams's Sports in my area and their wedges actually are nice looking. They even had a 68* wedge. I'd live to just play with that one..lol

 

 

Fairways & Greens 4ever

I used to have their 68* wedge back in the late '90s. Its pretty much a flop shot club. You just have to be really precise with it because its very easy to either slide the club right under the ball and have it go 20 yards and its easy to skull it and hit a 100-yard line drive.

[Bobtrumpet]

Another guy brought up conformity. It may not be a biggie for some guys, but I play at least one tournament a month (at least my club's monthly medal). Being known as an "equipment guy" I could never live down the ignominy of getting DQ'd for playing a club not on the conforming list. Even for regular rounds which at my club are all used for handicapping purposes we can only use conforming clubs.

 

FWIW and FYI: Just checked the list at usga.org - there are a lot of Pinemeadow driver heads listed as conforming (and no entries on the non-conforming list). I just built a driver using an Acer XF driver head from Hireko, and the driver heads (various lofts) are listed as conforming.

[Shambles]

Just an observation.

 

A fair number of the equipment manufacturers are little more than component assemblers with their own brand. Ping started that way and grew to be a giant because of genuine superior design and engineering very much helped by a very clumsy attempt to ban their clubs. I'm of the opinion that a lot of the established companies are just selling variations of a theme as new discoveries. It's why I also look at components. I keep looking for the next big thing.

 

 

Shambles

[xxio]

FWIW and FYI: Just checked the list at usga.org - there are a lot of Pinemeadow driver heads listed as conforming (and no entries on the non-conforming list). I just built a driver using an Acer XF driver head from Hireko, and the driver heads (various lofts) are listed as conforming.

 

 

I saw that too, that is why I mentioned Taylor Fit and not Pinemeadow. I did notice most of the Pinemeadow drivers on the conforming list are not clones or at least I cannot see which OEM drivers they resemble. I still see a few that are however in the clone vein.

 

My point is what Tyk has said in a whole lot better way. Clones are designed not to sell performance, but designed to sell "lookalike". Otherwise why would they put "similar to" in the marketing speak. If they perform its a bonus...even a broken clock is correct twice a day.

 

Just wondering which OEM driver is the XF trying to look like? I can't really tell from the USGA conforming list images.

[xxio]

FWIW and FYI: Just checked the list at usga.org - there are a lot of Pinemeadow driver heads listed as conforming (and no entries on the non-conforming list). I just built a driver using an Acer XF driver head from Hireko, and the driver heads (various lofts) are listed as conforming.

 

 

I saw that too, that is why I mentioned Taylor Fit and not Pinemeadow. I did notice most of the Pinemeadow drivers on the conforming list are not clones or at least I cannot see which OEM drivers they resemble. I still see a few that are however in the clone vein.

 

My point is what Tyk has said in a whole lot better way. Clones are designed not to sell performance, but designed to sell "lookalike". Otherwise why would they put "similar to" in the marketing speak. If they perform its a bonus...even a broken clock is correct twice a day.

 

Just wondering which OEM driver is the XF trying to look like? I can't really tell from the USGA conforming list images.

[xxio]

Wasn't that ERC the one that Palmer was coming out in support of for "recreational" golfers? Obviously, I never hit it. Did ya get that much more distance?

 

Fairways & Greens 4ever

 

 

The much ado about high CoR drivers was solved by Tom Wishon. IIRC he conducted a test on same drivers with only the CoR being the difference. He found the high CoR drivers produced the same launch but the higher CoR driver produced lower spin rates= "knuckleball" effect.

 

The solution was to design drivers that launched the same/higher with lower spin...thus the "high launch, low spin" mantra in driver design was born.

[ZenGolfer]

Just an observation.

 

A fair number of the equipment manufacturers are little more than component assemblers with their own brand. Ping started that way and grew to be a giant because of genuine superior design and engineering very much helped by a very clumsy attempt to ban their clubs. I'm of the opinion that a lot of the established companies are just selling variations of a theme as new discoveries. It's why I also look at components. I keep looking for the next big thing.

 

 

Shambles

Agree. It seems like they constantly recycle old designs or copy each other and try to tell the consumers that some new clubs is so revolutionary. IMO, they all copy and clone each other which is nothing different than what clones do at a fraction of what name brand clubs cost.

[Shambles]

Agree. It seems like they constantly recycle old designs or copy each other and try to tell the consumers that some new clubs is so revolutionary. IMO, they all copy and clone each other which is nothing different than what clones do at a fraction of what name brand clubs cost.

 

Some caution is needed in reaching a conclusion on just the basis of this factoid.

 

Well established OEM's and component makers out to establish a good reputation need to be identified as a separate class from the similarly seeming garage operation that is so very tempting to would be businessmen who are more interested in buying cheap and selling high than making a good worthy product to sell. There are just too many factors in what constitutes a good club as against a bad one, and some of them we are not well equipped nor competent to measure. A set of irons seasoned with bad lies, bad bounce and bad loft can sabotage your game considerably and if the player involved is a new guy with few knowledgeable friends, they can be outright destructive to the development of his swing. Woods are even worse as they are even more difficult to measure for loft and lie. there is also the business of bad metal that can be the cause a higher percentage of breakage in any given lot.

 

There are component manufacturers I am willing to take a chance on, but these are more often the ones who have already pretty much proven themselves with a history of delivering good product. After all, even name brands experience failure at times. We just have to accept that there are no absolute guarantees anywhere, but the risk of loss is greater with the no name than with the known name. Look carefully before you leap.

 

 

Shambles

[MattF]

Just wondering which OEM driver is the XF trying to look like? I can't really tell from the USGA conforming list images.

 

If you look on their site, to me at least, the head looks old school, like a Ping G5 in shape, not the elongated thing that a lot of OEMs have gone to.

 

I really don't believe they are trying to look like anyone, they just design their heads, like the rest of the OEMs and component companies, and they all happen to look the same shape in most ways.

[xxio]

In that case IMHO they would'nt be clones. Clones are sold on the premise that they are just that "clones". A new or substantially different head sold to stand on it's own merits would be a component.

[Kanoito]

Counterfeits are made to fool people into believing they are buying the real deal.

Clones aren't. They state "comparable to" so you can have an idea of how they play (i.e. a SGI shovel or a player's CB, etc)

 

Assuming that the clone DOES come from the same foundry and molds, wouldn't you be paying for the "looks" AND the performance?

[ZenGolfer]

Some caution is needed in reaching a conclusion on just the basis of this factoid.

 

Well established OEM's and component makers out to establish a good reputation need to be identified as a separate class from the similarly seeming garage operation that is so very tempting to would be businessmen who are more interested in buying cheap and selling high than making a good worthy product to sell. There are just too many factors in what constitutes a good club as against a bad one, and some of them we are not well equipped nor competent to measure. A set of irons seasoned with bad lies, bad bounce and bad loft can sabotage your game considerably and if the player involved is a new guy with few knowledgeable friends, they can be outright destructive to the development of his swing. Woods are even worse as they are even more difficult to measure for loft and lie. there is also the business of bad metal that can be the cause a higher percentage of breakage in any given lot.

 

There are component manufacturers I am willing to take a chance on, but these are more often the ones who have already pretty much proven themselves with a history of delivering good product. After all, even name brands experience failure at times. We just have to accept that there are no absolute guarantees anywhere, but the risk of loss is greater with the no name than with the known name. Look carefully before you leap.

 

 

Shambles

IMO, the risk is equal either way. Ive heard plenty of stories of people who bought irons where the lofts/lies were all over the place, driver faces that cracked, shafts that broke and dont even get me started on the consistency of shaft flex.

When a clone company uses the same foundry that makes a clubhead for the big boys, Im not at all worried about quality, especially from a well-known clone company like Pinemeadow. Im not convinced that the big company care about putting out quality clubs as much as we'd like to think.

[GolfSpy Tim]

I've got a great one.... buy used clones - that should be the ultimate position for money saving and performance?

[xxio]

Counterfeits are made to fool people into believing they are buying the real deal.

Clones aren't. They state "comparable to" so you can have an idea of how they play (i.e. a SGI shovel or a player's CB, etc)

 

Assuming that the clone DOES come from the same foundry and molds, wouldn't you be paying for the "looks" AND the performance?

 

 

There in lies the issue and how the clone companies work. The looks will lead the buyer to assume they are the same. Will we ever know for sure? OEMs will market their tech (again whether it is forged composite, internal VFT/ICT, etc.). Clones market "looks like".

 

Even if it comes from the same foundry it is not a sure thing. Even OEMs will approach a foundry design and say if we take out the internal VFT, or we do not chemically mill the inside, or we do a different type of welding inside...how much can we save. That product will look exactly the same on the outside.

 

There was a thread either here on in another forum in which a fake which looked exactly the same on the outside was different on the inside. Welding was sloppy, the ICT was not there. I could assume the same for a clone. To cut corners maybe a different/cheaper welding technique was employed or the internal VFT is not present.

 

We will never know so the buying of a clone is a risk. I have taken it before. It has worked and it has not.

 

I wonder rather buy a component where they tell me the facts and tech of the product, not the fact that it "looks similar to".

[Shambles]

IMO, the risk is equal either way. Ive heard plenty of stories of people who bought irons where the lofts/lies were all over the place, driver faces that cracked, shafts that broke and dont even get me started on the consistency of shaft flex.

When a clone company uses the same foundry that makes a clubhead for the big boys, Im not at all worried about quality, especially from a well-known clone company like Pinemeadow. Im not convinced that the big company care about putting out quality clubs as much as we'd like to think.

 

 

If you buy from a respectable component company your chances are reasonable. As long as you can weigh the heads before the assembly and measure for loft and lie your chances get better. Such measures are fairly accessible and if you can inspect and measure the heads at the store your chances get better provided you know how to measure. I just feel that the time and trouble you go through doing these measures is not necessarily worth the savings, if any. All the more if you compare the cost savings to that of second hand OEM products where you are more secure as to the quality of your purchase. In that market the only thing you need to really worry about is buying a lemon or something that had already been adjusted by a fool who did not know what he was doing and was unable to restore it properly.

 

I am always suspicious of clones and would rather refrain from supporting them but legitimate components are always worth a closer look from me for possibilities especially if they come with a fitting from qualified fitters and are assembled to my spec. Components actually represent a superior purchase under such conditions. The only thing they lack is the heavy and expensive advertising and the premium that OEM's too often demand for all their effort and expense in selling you that product.

 

I'm suspecting you are a bit loose with the use of clone as a description and failing to distinguish the component from the clone. Clones are not components in my eyes. They are suspect from the word go and fairly automatically cause me to look away. Components, on the other hand, represent the effort of some yet unknown club designer to produce a good product on the basis of what he considers good product. I like looking at components for the next great idea. I think they are a creche and am happy to support them if they were available for me to get a good look see. You do need some caution here because a lot of instant experts also populate this place. It's just good fun to find the rare jewel and know you found and recognized it. Just stay away from the clones and copies. Even if they play well enough for your skill level, the people behind them are thieves and do not deserve your support and encouragement.

 

 

 

Shambles